TheMostReadBook.org

An English translation of the Quran that is as close as possible to the Arabic sacred text
View active topics
  Verse(s):    
View unanswered posts





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 22:39 abrogate 39:3?
PostPosted: 25 Jan 2010, 04:18 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
This case is one of many about whether fighting was allowed. Fighting was not allowed for Muslims in the beginning and then permission was granted for self defense and finally fighting became mandatory, many scholars believe, by virtue of the sword verse, 5:5.

For this case,

is claimed to have been abrogated by

Jalaal-ud-Deen As-Suyooti mentioned this case casually in his book, "Al-Itqaan fi `Uloom Al-Qur'aan". He does not count it among the twenty he settled on as being valid abrogation cases. Actually, my copy of his book names the abrogated verse as the one containing the words, "الله يحكم بينكم" but I could not find a verse containing these words which also talks about not fighting, so my best guess is that A-Suyooti meant the words, "الله يحكم بينهم" which is 39:3.

I don't know why As-Suyooti discounts the case as he does not argue it in his book, but I see why rather easily. 39:3 is declarative, does not speak of hostile adversaries and does not prohibit Muslims from fighting the disbelievers, except by implication that it is God who will judge between them, which remains true, while 22:39 gives permission for fighting back.

Al-Khazraji says the abrogating verse is the sword verse.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 22:39 abrogate 39:3?
PostPosted: 25 Jan 2010, 07:15 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
I don't know why As-Suyooti discounts the case as he does not argue it in his book, but I see why rather easily. 39:3 is declarative, does not speak of hostile adversaries and does not prohibit Muslims from fighting the disbelievers, except by implication that it is God who will judge between them, which remains true, while 22:39 gives permission for fighting back.

Agreed. This is a pretty weak claim.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 21 Aug 2010, 14:46 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
For:
Unnamed.

Against:
As-Suyooti (implied).

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently 13 Nov 2019, 12:10

All times are UTC

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group